A Montréaler in 2018 voting PLQ to stop the CAQ is like a Torontonian in 2000 voting PC to stop the Alliance. The parties aren't competing with each other in your riding, they're not particularly distinguishable in ideology or integrity, and they stand at least half a chance of merging before the following election.

Oh please. There is not much of a semblance to Mike Harris' PC party to the PLQ.

I have a disability. When the Liberals first won my cheque was cut a whole whopping $24 a month. Since then my cheque has increased over $50 from where it originally was years ago.

I don't remember having to live on PB & Jam sandwiches.

A false equivalency. And you would have to be a fool to think CAQ is no worse. They will be a REAL right of right of centre party. If you think austerity was bad under PLQ rule,well hold on to your hat,you AND I have not seen anything yet.

Unlike the PLQ a CAQ government is going to attack me,everyone in the same situation as me and those who have it worse than me. This whole laissez-faire attitude about CAQ makes me want to laugh and vomit at the same time.

It's not like QS or the PQ stand any chance this election. What am I supposed to do? Are you going to pay my rent when Legault puts a chainsaw to social services? Are you going to find me another doctor or nurse or pay for my meds?

The REAL Harrisite government is the one coming up around the bend. The fucking CAQ and their Donald Trump loving leader.

So spare me with your condemnation and ridicule. Maybe YOU should pull your head out of your ass.

Sorry for the insult I wrote at the end of my last comment. Understand that I am very concerned aboout my future,something that wouldn't concern me if the race was between the PLQ and the PQ.

Unfortunately,this election is like a colonoscopy with barbed wire and flames. The PQ have no one to blame but themselves for being irrelevant. They stand for nothing and the party has never recovered from the Lucien Bouchard era.

Honestly,I never voted for the PLQ,I never dreamed I would but the alternative is much,much worse and I'm helpless because I rely on disability to survive. I'm medically certified unable to work. My sickness makes it impossible to hold a job. I'm scared to be honest with you.Legauly is a demagogue a narcissist who has been doing everything in his power from trying to entice Anglophones to vote for him,then trying to entice sovereignists to vote for him,then back to the English community and just recently called for a new Quiet Revolution. He's an unprincipled asshole who is desperate for power and thinks the province should be run exactly like a business and not as the best interests of society (you really can't run a government like a business,just look South at the Trump administration,that's what they are doing and it's a complete horror show)

I'm certainly not rooting for the CAQ. My loathing for the CAQ, however, is not sufficient to overcome my loathing for the PLQ and make me root for them, either.

Quote:

I usually vote my conscience. I vote QS and I'vd been voting for them since the old UFP party. They are not going to win the election this year.They have no chance,which is something that pains me to say but I'm just being realistic.

The NDPQ are not really an option because they just recently became a party in Quebec again and I can't even tell you the name of the party's leader. I don't see them fairing any better than QS,they should have become a party YEARS ago back when Jack Layton turned the province Orange. They are not positioned to win this election whether I vote for them or not. I have to resign myself to the fact that CAQ will most likely win and win a majority. It's a horse race in Montreal between the PLQ and CAQ which both surprises me and makes me depressed at the same time. CAQ has the regions in their back pockets,they will probably win Laval,I feel sick just writing down the words.

My riding is traditionally a Liberal strong hold. If it's a dog fight between those 2 parties in my riding,I feel I have no choice but to try to defeat CAQ.

Saint-Henri-Sainte-Anne is Liberal, yes, but it's not Liberal the same way my riding (Westmount-Saint-Louis) is Liberal. The CAQ/ADQ have never done better than 17% there, and only got 5% in the last by-election. It's one of QS's best ridings that they don't hold. Given the recent collapse in PQ support, a decent case can be made that contest will be between the PLQ and QS, with the PQ in 3rd. The CAQ leading on the island as a whole doesn't mean they stand a chance in SH-SA. Even if your overriding priority is to prevent the CAQ from forming the next government, voting Liberal in your riding won't help, save for some exceedingly unlikely scenario where the PLQ and CAQ are tied in seat counts in a minority situation, and QS decides to commit suicide by backing Legault.

Quote:

I'm confused and disgusted. And as I said,I seriously fear my future,this is the sole reason why I'm even entertaining the thought of voting PLQ. But in the next few months,the fate of the election will be written on the wall,I may not have to vote against my values. By then CAQ will be gauranteed victory and I will just throw in my vote to QS knowing that it's all over.

What you said about the PLQ and what you say about the PLQ is true. I just don't buy them being worse than CAQ and I'm very sorry Charest fucked you over as a student. I seriously feel your pain and understand your disdain for the PLQ.

I'm just very concerned about my survival. That is all.

I understand your concern for survival (I have my own!). Here's the thing, though: the Québec electorate is delightfully volatile. This isn't just me whistling past the graveyard. Anything could happen between now and election day. The ADQ went from one seat to official opposition and back to distant third within a year and a half. The Union Nationale and PQ both went from upstart fringe parties to institutions within similarly compressed timeframes. Federally, Québec was solid Liberal until it was solid Tory until it was solid Bloc until it was painted orange from Nunavik to New York. People (especially francophones) seem to be willing to change their minds from election to election here.

That doesn't mean I expect either QS or NPDQ to win majority governments this year. It just means that I'm not willing to commit to the conventional wisdom this far out. And even if the conventional wisdom happens to be correct this year, in your riding, a swing from the PLQ to the CAQ would most greatly benefit QS.

Your vote is your own, of course. It just seems like a shame to spend it on the PLQ in a riding where actual progressives have a decent shot.

to be competitive there, the CAQ would suddenly have to triple its support in the riding from 2014 and quadruple it, at the very least from its showing in the 2015 byelection. I now understand your concern and some of your personal situation, but are you actually seeing signs that support for CAQ is on a massive upsurge in your riding? I'm only asking because, based on the numbers I've seen at that link, it doesn't really look as though you'd actually have to make the choice you're talking about here-and I'd also say that if CAQ was making the kind of gains that would make it competitive in your riding, the probably overall outcome would be a CAQ majority comparable to the ones Peter Lougheed usually to win for the Alberta PC's.

Your vote is your own, of course. It just seems like a shame to spend it on the PLQ in a riding where actual progressives have a decent shot.

Well you've given me some food for thought. If my riding is going to go Liberal , I shouldn't stop my normal voting record.

I remember the student protests and how you all were treated. If I had been a student at that time,I'd certainly loathe the PLQ.

The scenario you made of the PLQ and CAQ tying and QS would have to break that tie and sided with Legault,I'd never consider EVER voting for them again. But they'd piss off someone regardless of who they chose to prop up. I know the PQ would support Legault but like I said,the PQ are irrelevant for a reason. I'm hoping that in the end,there will be no majority. I'm not sure if it would solve the problem but at least either CAQ or PLQ or both will be ruling on a very tight leash. There could be room for some decent policies (that was pretty optimistic of me,I'm a natural pessimist) But who knows? How many months are left until the election? Maybe another party other than CAQ or PLQ will pull an upset. I guess anything is possible right now.

to be competitive there, the CAQ would suddenly have to triple its support in the riding from 2014 and quadruple it, at the very least from its showing in the 2015 byelection. I now understand your concern and some of your personal situation, but are you actually seeing signs that support for CAQ is on a massive upsurge in your riding? I'm only asking because, based on the numbers I've seen at that link, it doesn't really look as though you'd actually have to make the choice you're talking about here-and I'd also say that if CAQ was making the kind of gains that would make it competitive in your riding, the probably overall outcome would be a CAQ majority comparable to the ones Peter Lougheed usually to win for the Alberta PC's.

Truth be told,I have no proof to back up a CAQ upset in my riding. I'm keeping my eyes peeled and my ears open though.

If it's the same old same old,I have no reason to vote against my interests or at least vote for a party I never voted for before.

I just hope that at this time next year,I'll still have a doctor,a nurse,my meds paid for and my social housing unit intact without a significant raise of rent.

There's some months to go. I guess that's plenty of time for CAQ to capitulate. And I can,with a clear conscience,vote for the party I have always voted for.

But like I said to cco. If it's a minority government situation where QS held the balance of power and backed Legault,it's salut,au revoir to QS.

That is true. In the federal elections, Turdeau won in the riding just north of me, in the Québec, Lisée just east. The PQ had a disastrous campaign here, and the federal Fiberals didn't do well at all. It is VERY important to elect progressive candidates. Nobody else will call out the right wing.

If the NPDQ were to be a real thing in this election, it would be a huge mistake for it to make a point of running significantly to the right of QS. The voters who'd be most likely to support such a party would be left-allophones whose main point of disgreement with QS is its relative emphasis on sovereigntism(it's nt worth trying to appeal t left-anglophones there, since that demographic is close to extinction withing Quebec). Left-allophones aren't going to break with the PLQ to switch to a party that blurs it's differences with the PLQ or takes a "we've got no truck with that 'socialist' nonsense" tone-the only thing that would induce them to do so(assuming tey've only been voting PLQ to stop the PQ when it was seen as a threat and are now doing so to stop the CAQ because they see it's program as a threat) would be a party that was both federalist enough to reassure them AND radical enough to represent a clear break with everything they dislike and fear about the PLQ.

They're not entirely competing for the same voters -- NPDQ could peel off some of my fellow not-quite-extinct-yet anglophone leftists, while QS divides up the similarly not-quite-extinct sovereigntist left -- but there will inevitably be overlap and competition. Furthermore, the electoral financing law here strongly discourages any kind of non-aggression pact. The vast majority of available financing for a party comes if it hits a certain threshold provincewide (0.5% or 1%, I forget), so there's no incentive to stand down in a QS riding, where 800 votes or so might push the party over the threshold.

If the NPDQ were to be a real thing in this election, it would be a huge mistake for it to make a point of running significantly to the right of QS. The voters who'd be most likely to support such a party would be left-allophones whose main point of disgreement with QS is its relative emphasis on sovereigntism(it's nt worth trying to appeal t left-anglophones there, since that demographic is close to extinction withing Quebec). Left-allophones aren't going to break with the PLQ to switch to a party that blurs it's differences with the PLQ or takes a "we've got no truck with that 'socialist' nonsense" tone-the only thing that would induce them to do so(assuming tey've only been voting PLQ to stop the PQ when it was seen as a threat and are now doing so to stop the CAQ because they see it's program as a threat) would be a party that was both federalist enough to reassure them AND radical enough to represent a clear break with everything they dislike and fear about the PLQ.

Francophones are the primary target as they are the majority population in Quebec. They haven't been voting QS either. Why do you think that is? It also gives allophones and anglophones another choice.

QS is way way way way farther left than the NDP. There is an ocean between the PLQ and QS. Plenty of room for a centre-left party. Do you think only 7% of Quebecers lean left of the Quebec Liberals?

I don't want to be Captain Bringdown but all this talk about the NDPQ is premature. They only came to life a few months ago. This election they will finish behind QS. I don't even know the party leader's name and they get absolutely no coverage from the media.

They will not become a relevant party until after the election when most people realize there actually is an NDPQ and it's going to take 5 years minimum for the party to be in a position to win an election.

They should have came up years ago when Qu'ebec went full on orange at a federal level. They organized themselves a year before the election.

Save your enthusiasm for the next election. Right now the only left wing party is QS with actual members of the national assembly. They are the only leftist opton this year. Voting for a party that is still getting oprganized and not even recognized in polling is just taking away votes from QS.

They will not become a relevant party until after the election when most people realize there actually is an NDPQ and it's going to take 5 years minimum for the party to be in a position to win an election.

You are probably right about minimum 5 years to win and even that is optimistic. Doesn't mean they won't make inroads during the next election. Quebecers are nothing if not unpredictable.

alan smithee wrote:

Right now the only left wing party is QS with actual members of the national assembly. They are the only leftist opton this year. Voting for a party that is still getting oprganized and not even recognized in polling is just taking away votes from QS.

Nope. If QS is the only "leftist" party then for many Quebecers there is no progressive party to vote for because they would never ever consider voting for a party without even knowing who would become premier. Would it be the president? Would it be one of the spokespeople? Who would make final decisions? The whole "no leader" thing, for many people, puts QS in the Mickey Mouse party category. QS is simply too radical for many people and their dedication to sovereignty has increased with the merger.

The PQ used to represent the moderate left. Now they are centre-right sovereignists. Francophones who are fed-up with the sovereignty issue are choosing between CAQ and the Liberals or holding their noses to vote PQ. The QS has managed to win 3 seats out of 125 in 12 years (2006). CAQ was founded in 2011, 5 years younger, and has 21 seats and is 1st in the polls.

My theory, people aren't voting based on left and right. People are fed up with the Liberals. They are long in the tooth. The PQ is a shambles and still obsessing over sovereignty. That leaves CAQ, the non-sovereignist offshoot from the PQ. Hence, they are now in first place.

There is no viable moderate left party in Quebec to replace the PQ. That is the position that the NDPQ can fill.

After having looked more closely at riding level results I can see why QS is worried about their seats and people in general are worried about splitting the vote on the left and don't want NDP candidates in QS ridings.

Even so the urge to deny voters a choice is not democratic and isn't necessarily the right move strategically either. I see the NDPQ as taking votes away from the PQ and CAQ and Liberals not from QS. It has been pointed out that there is overlap in voluteers for QS and NDP therefore the NDP will have difficultly attracting volunteers in those communities that typically vote QS. NDP candidates could end up giving QS a bigger win by taking votes from the other parties. Wouldn't you say QS voters are more politically aware than the average voter? They are voting for a radical party. Why would they switch to voting for a new moderate NDPQ party? These are people well aware of the dangers of vote splitting that fully understand that they are voting at the riding level.

Colluding to offer me fewer choices dooms the parties who participate. It's trying to give me "no other choice". I would be sorely tempted to stay home or vote Liberal rather than see a party take power that denied me a choice. If the two parties feel that close they should just merge. If they aren't close enough to merge then I should get to choose which I support with my vote. If I want to vote stratetically I can make that choice on my own. I don't need the parties trying to force my hand.

I'll take your word that CAQ is a federalist party but I don't buy it. Legault was a sovereignist now all of a sudden he's a federalist? He's nothing but an opportunist,he'll say ANYTHING to get support. He's a sovereignist one time,he's a federalist the next and he called on Quebecers for a new 'Quiet Revolution' what the hell does that even mean?

Legault is exactly like Donald Trump, a pathological liar,an opportunist, a jump from one side of the electorate to the other and he wants to run Québec as a business. That's what he touts himself as.Thats his plan.

But look at the US. They are running the government like a business,profit driven and gutting the social safety net for tax cuts to businesses and the wealthy.

Legault is a snake and cannot be trusted.

A CAQ government is going to be a HUGE clusterfuck for those living in poverty or just above the poverty line. NOTHING to be excited about,unless I was wealthy and regressive and incapable of empathizing with anyone and ready to sell out my grandmother if it meant furthering my wealth.

I agree with you about QS. They need to name a leader,not a group of leaders and they have to tone down the sovereignist angle. People are no longer interested in it. Times have changed. But I dont think they are 'radical' by any stretch of the imagination unless you pit them against a party like CAQ who are right wing radicals.

It looks like Québec is as Conservative as Southern and Mid-west Americans and it saddens me because we actually WERE once a progressive province.

But I've been a Montrealer all my life. I can tell you that the vast majority of people I know or have known and those who surround me in every neighbourhood I have lived in are open minded and progressive. The regions are dragging us not only into the past but toward a Trumpian disaster.

I wish I had the means to get the fuck out of here and move somewhere that is progressive like Vancouver. But does anyone have a million dollars to lend me to buy a shack attached to an outhouse? I complain about the cost of living here, Vancouver is ridiculously and despicably expensive. That's the only blemish I see when it comes to the Left Coast.

Pondering, your evident view that the "final decision" is made by the "premier" is why I will never again vote for a provincial party which slavishly gives dictatorial powers to a "leader".

I didn't say that was my view. I said that is what voters will question. It may not be right for them to think that way but that doesn't change the fact that voters expect a party to have a single leader that can make decisions. One person they hold most responsible for governing. Quebecers voted for Layton not the NDP. They voted for Trudeau, not the Liberals. The same holds provincially. Change leaders reset the playing field. Not having a leader to take the position of Premier is a huge deficit.

I'll take your word that CAQ is a federalist party but I don't buy it. Legault was a sovereignist now all of a sudden he's a federalist? He's nothing but an opportunist,he'll say ANYTHING to get support. He's a sovereignist one time,he's a federalist the next and he called on Quebecers for a new 'Quiet Revolution' what the hell does that even mean?

They aren't literally federalist but they aren't separatists either and they have no intention of ever having a referendum.

I'll take your word that CAQ is a federalist party but I don't buy it. Legault was a sovereignist now all of a sudden he's a federalist? He's nothing but an opportunist,he'll say ANYTHING to get support. He's a sovereignist one time,he's a federalist the next and he called on Quebecers for a new 'Quiet Revolution' what the hell does that even mean?

They aren't literally federalist but they aren't separatists either and they have no intention of ever having a referendum.

What happened to his promise to have a referendum within 10 years if elected? He's a liar. As I said,the man will say anything to get elected. And thats what makes him dangerous. It all stems from not getting the nomination for leader of the PQ. So off he goes and starts his own party and precedes to say anything that may be popular at the time. He's a true opportunist.

I know other leaders may do the same,but not quite as aggresively and shamelessly as Legault. I know politics is all about attaining power but I don't remeber a leader make so many different promises always at the precise moment an idea is floated out there by one of the other parties or even a sondage by the Journal de Montréal. His constant change of ideology is just not humanly possible. It's like Jason Kenney not succeeding in becoming the leader of Alberta,changing parties and changing his ideology and all of a sudden he's a full fledged socialist simply because Alberta has tired of Conservative policies and then deciding he loves immigration and welfare because someone whispered in his ear what direction the wind seems to be blowing that particular day.

Even Jason Kenney is a more principled politician. Legault is a charlatan whom I gaurantee you is watching the so-called populism in the US and is taking notes from the Donald Trump fiasco that is happening. I remember him comparting himself with Trump. 'He has bragged that he's the right person to lead Québec because he wants to turn it into Alberta,he wants to run the government like a business,where public funds would be prioritized for business first at the cost of what he feels is spending waste -- our social services.

I'm sure he'll prove to be just as big of a megalomaniac as Trump once elected,I'm convinced that will be the story,he'll get drunk on his power. Like I said,he's been dying to be leader of Québec since his days in the PQ he was passed over and that is the ONLY reason he's not still a péquiste. He was passed over by the party because I believe he was too right wing for the PQ. He's another Lucien Bouchard,minus the principles. And Bouchard quit the PQ because the party wouldn't let him go as far as he wanted to. And that is Legault and now that he is a leader of his own party,he can now get to work starting where Bouchard ended.

He's a sovereignist,this I can assure you because you don't change ideology over night like he did when he saw it as an advantage to seperate himself from his true party the PQ.

I don't trust a word he says when it comes to a possible 3rd referendum. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing in that regard.

I'll take your word that CAQ is a federalist party but I don't buy it. Legault was a sovereignist now all of a sudden he's a federalist? He's nothing but an opportunist,he'll say ANYTHING to get support. He's a sovereignist one time,he's a federalist the next and he called on Quebecers for a new 'Quiet Revolution' what the hell does that even mean?

I don't trust a word he says when it comes to a possible 3rd referendum. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing in that regard.

I can't stand the man I wouldn't vote for him in a million years. He is still in first place in the polls. I think/hope the Liberals will overtake him in the end but right now he is taking the anti-Liberal vote not QS. The anti-Liberal vote needs somewhere to go.

I'll take your word that CAQ is a federalist party but I don't buy it. Legault was a sovereignist now all of a sudden he's a federalist? He's nothing but an opportunist,he'll say ANYTHING to get support. He's a sovereignist one time,he's a federalist the next and he called on Quebecers for a new 'Quiet Revolution' what the hell does that even mean?

I don't trust a word he says when it comes to a possible 3rd referendum. He's a wolf in sheep's clothing in that regard.

I can't stand the man I wouldn't vote for him in a million years. He is still in first place in the polls. I think/hope the Liberals will overtake him in the end but right now he is taking the anti-Liberal vote not QS. The anti-Liberal vote needs somewhere to go.

Well,get ready for massive tax cuts to business at the peril of the disenfranchised and health and education.That's where we're headed. It's the symptom of every government who has done that. Unfortunately,Québec isn't as rich as Alberta. A lot of people are going to suffer.

Say sovereignty becomes popular the PQ wins an election and calls a referendum, does anyone honestly believe that Legault would march in a unity parade... please. He was for sovereignty until 2012 (or maybe I'm off by a couple of years) then suddenly he becomes against it because it was dragging him down, he goes where the wind blows. I don't mind a politician believing in an independent Quebec, I disagree but competing viewpoints is why we have a democracy to see which policies win in the free battleground of ideas. I do however object to politicians like Legault taking us for morons.

Say sovereignty becomes popular the PQ wins an election and calls a referendum, does anyone honestly believe that Legault would march in a unity parade... please. He was for sovereignty until 2012 (or maybe I'm off by a couple of years) then suddenly he becomes against it because it was dragging him down, he goes where the wind blows. I don't mind a politician believing in an independent Quebec, I disagree but competing viewpoints is why we have a democracy to see which policies win in the free battleground of ideas. I do however object to politicians like Legault taking us for morons.

Of course not but what difference does it make? He won't have a referendum or push for sovereignty therefore people who would otherwise vote Liberal will vote for him.

Every sovereignist party says their referendum will be in their "second mandate". Traditionally, a "mandate" in a multi-party FPTP system is over 40% of the popular vote. It is unlikely any party will get a "mandate" on those terms in the next Quebec general election.

Say sovereignty becomes popular the PQ wins an election and calls a referendum, does anyone honestly believe that Legault would march in a unity parade... please. He was for sovereignty until 2012 (or maybe I'm off by a couple of years) then suddenly he becomes against it because it was dragging him down, he goes where the wind blows. I don't mind a politician believing in an independent Quebec, I disagree but competing viewpoints is why we have a democracy to see which policies win in the free battleground of ideas. I do however object to politicians like Legault taking us for morons.

A sovereignist is a sovereignist is a sovereignist. They never change. Of course he bills himself as a 'federalist',that happened the day it was clearly no longer a popular policy. the DAY that happened. And then he jumped to the federalist schpiel as he saw it would garner him more support. As I said,he's an opportunist,it had nothing with changing ideology. The man would label himself a communist if it would win him more support.

Anyone believing in the baloney he is selling really needs to give their heads a good shake. He's a Bouchard PQ lackey. He only left the party because he was not given the nomination of leader back 8 years ago or so.

And just like Bouchard,the PQ ultimately rejected him as leader because they would never let him go as far as he wanted to.

Now that he has his own party,he can and he will. The PQ shifted to the Right with Bouchard,most of the Bouchard PQ has since been turfed. But the party hasn't recovered from the Bouchard experiment.

If Legault wants to sell himself as a federalist it's just political opportunism. Nothing less,nothing more. If down the road sovereignty becomes popular again,he will jump off the federalist boat quicker than you can say O Canada.

Don't be a fool. You don't wake up and change ideoloogy over night. He's an opportunist and like Trump,he's a grifter and a man who believes he's ready to lead Quebec because he's a ' businessman' .And make no mistake,he will run the province like it is a business and I'm completely convinced that he's been watching Trump and his economic policies and has been taking notes. This is very bad news.

BTW,Legault is the same man that voted not to observe January 29 as anti-Islamophobia Day because he didn't want to piss off his base. The liberals too but that was totally out of political fear. CAQ is the party of La Meute. ' Nuff said.

I don't want to be Captain Bringdown but all this talk about the NDPQ is premature. They only came to life a few months ago. This election they will finish behind QS. I don't even know the party leader's name and they get absolutely no coverage from the media.

They will not become a relevant party until after the election when most people realize there actually is an NDPQ and it's going to take 5 years minimum for the party to be in a position to win an election.

They should have came up years ago when Qu'ebec went full on orange at a federal level. They organized themselves a year before the election.

Save your enthusiasm for the next election. Right now the only left wing party is QS with actual members of the national assembly. They are the only leftist opton this year. Voting for a party that is still getting oprganized and not even recognized in polling is just taking away votes from QS.

2023 should be more optimistic.

I support QS. Disagree with their insistence on centering sovereigntism(why prioritize that NOW when an independence referendum would go down to a landslide defeat? What's the point?), but they represent the things I want far more than anyone else. Was simply trying to address the question of what might be the best strategy for the NPD-Q if it is going to be in existence.

The reason I referenced allophones as a primary target for an NPD-Q is that they are the most naturally "left" voters in Quebec, being both a collection of historically oppressed communities in the way that Quebec francophones no longer are and also having among the lowest-income levels in Quebec-other, of course than the impoverished francophones in "the regions" who always vote for the most right-wing party on the ballot, voting Creditiste and Union Nationale in the past and CAQ in the present simply as a protest against modern life and the multicultural fact.

At this stage, most left-francophones would either vote QS or-out of past habit more than anything else-PQ, since left-francophone politics in Quebec is still almost always sovereigntist in basic orientation even if it's essentially moving towards putting it aside for the forseeable future. Those francophones who identify strongly as federalists, who put federalism ahead of most other concerns(with a handful of exceptions such as yourself)are mainly right-of-center in their political and economic views. If this hadn't been the case for a very long time, it wouldn't have taken the NDP thirty years from its founding to win a federal byelection in Quebec and it's likely that the NPD-Q would have displaced the PLQ as the main federalist party in Quebec sometime in the Seventies(moving into the space created when Bourassa abandoned every vestige of "The Quiet Revolution" and turning the PLQ into the party of corporate Quebec.

I don't want to be Captain Bringdown but all this talk about the NDPQ is premature. They only came to life a few months ago. This election they will finish behind QS. I don't even know the party leader's name and they get absolutely no coverage from the media.

They will not become a relevant party until after the election when most people realize there actually is an NDPQ and it's going to take 5 years minimum for the party to be in a position to win an election.

They should have came up years ago when Qu'ebec went full on orange at a federal level. They organized themselves a year before the election.

Save your enthusiasm for the next election. Right now the only left wing party is QS with actual members of the national assembly. They are the only leftist opton this year. Voting for a party that is still getting oprganized and not even recognized in polling is just taking away votes from QS.

2023 should be more optimistic.

I support QS. Disagree with their insistence on centering sovereigntism(why prioritize that NOW when an independence referendum would go down to a landslide defeat? What's the point?), but they represent the things I want far more than anyone else. Was simply trying to address the question of what might be the best strategy for the NPD-Q if it is going to be in existence.

The reason I referenced allophones as a primary target for an NPD-Q is that they are the most naturally "left" voters in Quebec, being both a collection of historically oppressed communities in the way that Quebec francophones no longer are and also having among the lowest-income levels in Quebec-other, of course than the impoverished francophones in "the regions" who always vote for the most right-wing party on the ballot, voting Creditiste and Union Nationale in the past and CAQ in the present simply as a protest against modern life and the multicultural fact.

At this stage, most left-francophones would either vote QS or-out of past habit more than anything else-PQ, since left-francophone politics in Quebec is still almost always sovereigntist in basic orientation even if it's essentially moving towards putting it aside for the forseeable future. Those francophones who identify strongly as federalists, who put federalism ahead of most other concerns(with a handful of exceptions such as yourself)are mainly right-of-center in their political and economic views. If this hadn't been the case for a very long time, it wouldn't have taken the NDP thirty years from its founding to win a federal byelection in Quebec and it's likely that the NPD-Q would have displaced the PLQ as the main federalist party in Quebec sometime in the Seventies(moving into the space created when Bourassa abandoned every vestige of "The Quiet Revolution" and turning the PLQ into the party of corporate Quebec.

Well we're on the same page. But I don't expect QS to win any more seats than they already have. This would be different with PR. Just like the federal parties, I don't see any of the provincial parties to support -- except for maybe QS.

If CAQ wins the election with a majority it will be as phony as Legault's claim that he is a federalist. Same goes for the PLQ and PQ.

QS will have to appeal to allophones and mainstream anglophones. This means they have to tone down the sovereignty side of the party and build a bigger tent.

I think the NDPQ will fill that void in a few years. What will happen with QS though? Hopefully people will see the NDPQ as a competent alternative to PLQ ad CAQ. That's going to take time. I'm not convinced that QS will ever appeal to the masses to become a ruling party. I see QS eventually being gobbled up by the PQ but the bright side to that is that QS would drag them to the left and they will become the progressive party they once were 40 years ago.

This way it will be a natural horse race between the PQ and NDPQ. CAQ will fade into oblivion with the PLQ unless there is a large right wing movement in Quebec which would prop up one or both those parties. Thankfully,that would split the vote between the 2 of them and they wouldn't go anywhere.

And if CAQ and PLQ were to rise from the ashes,PLQ would be the federalist right wing option and the CAQ would return to their sovereignist roots.

But who the hell knows? I'm still trying to figure out the upcoming election,never mind 5 or 10 years down the road.

Legault is not a federalist. His approach is to continue fighting for more powers for Quebec. No referendum. No talk of separation. (Separation by stealth)

That's fine. Quebecers don't care if he is actually a sovereignist. It doesn't matter. The point is not voting for parties that insist on talking about sovereignty and independence from Canada. Quebecers have accepted the numbers aren't there for separation so shut up about it already. Move on. It almost seemed that was what the PQ was doing until the famous fist pump. QS is still focused on sovereignty.

The only two (+1) parties not talking sovereignty are the Liberals and CAQ (+NDP).

The PQ used to be centre left, and quite left. The Quiet Revolution was about social justice not just language. The idea was not to exchange one set of oppressors for another. The regions voted PQ when the PQ was left of centre.

Legault is not a federalist. His approach is to continue fighting for more powers for Quebec. No referendum. No talk of separation. (Separation by stealth)

That's fine. Quebecers don't care if he is actually a sovereignist. It doesn't matter. The point is not voting for parties that insist on talking about sovereignty and independence from Canada. Quebecers have accepted the numbers aren't there for separation so shut up about it already. Move on. It almost seemed that was what the PQ was doing until the famous fist pump. QS is still focused on sovereignty.

The only two (+1) parties not talking sovereignty are the Liberals and CAQ (+NDP).

The PQ used to be centre left, and quite left. The Quiet Revolution was about social justice not just language. The idea was not to exchange one set of oppressors for another. The regions voted PQ when the PQ was left of centre.

The PQ in the 70's was a left wing progressive party. In the 80's they were shifting closer to the centre and then Lucien Bouchard and they went hard right and they've been a party without a direction ever after.

Seeing that they are very much open to welcoming PKP back to the party just proves that they stand for nothing other than sovereignty. They are irrelevant. And it looks like it's goinng to be YEARS before they will ever be relevant again.

The regions would never vote for a left wing PQ ever again. That part of Quebec is solidly Conservative and they will be the ones and are the ones propping up CAQ.

And once again,Legault can say anything he likes but behind the facade is a right wing sovereignist,make no mistake about it and if the issue of sovereignty were to become popular again,he'd jump ship from his federalist disguise. In a hot second at that. It would be naive to ever think that this man's ideology has changed at all since his days in the PQ. But he put it on the back burner because he wants power at any cost.

So OF COURSE Quebecers care if he's a sovereignist or not.

As for him calling for a 'new' Quiet Revolution,he most CERTAINLY IS NOT calling for social justice. You'd have to be on crack to think so.He'ss also a language wonk. So what does he mean? My guess is he's calling on Quebecers to accept to change what's left of any social justice that might still exist within the governments current and past.He's going to bankrupt us socially,that's the plan and to think any differently is to hide your head in the sand.

Legault is not a federalist. His approach is to continue fighting for more powers for Quebec. No referendum. No talk of separation. (Separation by stealth)

That's fine. Quebecers don't care if he is actually a sovereignist. It doesn't matter. The point is not voting for parties that insist on talking about sovereignty and independence from Canada. Quebecers have accepted the numbers aren't there for separation so shut up about it already. Move on. It almost seemed that was what the PQ was doing until the famous fist pump. QS is still focused on sovereignty.

The only two (+1) parties not talking sovereignty are the Liberals and CAQ (+NDP).

The PQ used to be centre left, and quite left. The Quiet Revolution was about social justice not just language. The idea was not to exchange one set of oppressors for another. The regions voted PQ when the PQ was left of centre.

I am aware that the Quiet Revolution was about much more than language-and it has always puzzled me that, after just barely losing to the Union Nationale in 1966(in a "wrong-winner" election-the PLQ beat the UN solidly in the popular vote, 47% to 41%)the PLQ would abandon the Quiet Revolution policies and move sharply to the right on economic and budgetary issues-and in so doing, open up space for the PQ on the "good government" center-left to left that otherwise would never have existed for that party.

Why do you think the PLQ made the decision to become a party of the center-right, Pondering? They hardly had anything to gain from doing so, and it clearly played a major role in the landslide defeat they experienced in '76.

Legault and the CAQ are not far from the old "not quite federalist, not quite something ELSE" position the UN took during the Duplessis eternity.

It seems like there's a bit of a sovereinty paradox in Canada, in which:

- we must always remember that some Quebec voters wish sovereignty

- we don't need to worry about those Quebec voters; it's over and done with for the next several generations

So, if you want to criticize something about Quebec, well, "remember those sovereigntists, and don't piss them off, lest they take their football and leave", or, "don't make any kind of special allowance for Quebec, because sovereignty is already laying in its cold grave. They're just another province now".

And once again,Legault can say anything he likes but behind the facade is a right wing sovereignist,make no mistake about it and if the issue of sovereignty were to become popular again,he'd jump ship from his federalist disguise. In a hot second at that. It would be naive to ever think that this man's ideology has changed at all since his days in the PQ. But he put it on the back burner because he wants power at any cost.

He isn't pretending to be federalist. He is just dropping the sovereignty by referendum issue. No change in ideology.

alan smithee wrote:

So OF COURSE Quebecers care if he's a sovereignist or not.

No they don't. They don't care about his ideology, many are not against sovereignty, they just don't want another referendum or more talk about separation. They just want the subject closed for now.

I agree that he is a right wing prick. He is still pulling votes from the Liberals and the PQ because he is willing to put the issue of sovereignty on the back burner and not talk about it or separation. I believe him because it isn't good for business. It would also be fine for QS and PQ to be ideologically sovereignist if they also agreed to just leave it on the back burner and promise not to have a referendum or push it in any way if elected; to focus 100% on governing the province. QS would still need a leader who would become Premier in the event that they won the election. Not having one signals they aren't even serious about winning the election.

It seems like there's a bit of a sovereinty paradox in Canada, in which:

- we must always remember that some Quebec voters wish sovereignty

- we don't need to worry about those Quebec voters; it's over and done with for the next several generations

So, if you want to criticize something about Quebec, well, "remember those sovereigntists, and don't piss them off, lest they take their football and leave", or, "don't make any kind of special allowance for Quebec, because sovereignty is already laying in its cold grave. They're just another province now".

Actually, it's just "this is Quebec's concern and nobody else. People outside Quebec aren't entitled to tell them they should be 'done with' anything".

And once again,Legault can say anything he likes but behind the facade is a right wing sovereignist,make no mistake about it and if the issue of sovereignty were to become popular again,he'd jump ship from his federalist disguise. In a hot second at that. It would be naive to ever think that this man's ideology has changed at all since his days in the PQ. But he put it on the back burner because he wants power at any cost.

He isn't pretending to be federalist. He is just dropping the sovereignty by referendum issue. No change in ideology.

alan smithee wrote:

So OF COURSE Quebecers care if he's a sovereignist or not.

No they don't. They don't care about his ideology, many are not against sovereignty, they just don't want another referendum or more talk about separation. They just want the subject closed for now.

I agree that he is a right wing prick. He is still pulling votes from the Liberals and the PQ because he is willing to put the issue of sovereignty on the back burner and not talk about it or separation. I believe him because it isn't good for business. It would also be fine for QS and PQ to be ideologically sovereignist if they also agreed to just leave it on the back burner and promise not to have a referendum or push it in any way if elected; to focus 100% on governing the province. QS would still need a leader who would become Premier in the event that they won the election. Not having one signals they aren't even serious about winning the election.

Oh Pondering. You may be right that he dropped sovereignty from official party policy but it's not because he's a federalist. Maybe in the interest of business but that's about it.

It would be like me becoming a Conservative over night. I'd need a full frontal lobotomy especially at this stage of my life,I'm too old to change and so is Legault.

Anyway,I've said a lot about Legault now and more than a majority of the things I've said about him is true.

If CAQ's success was simply because he's dropped sovereignty from the party's platform and that he's a 'federalist',the PLQ would be running away with this election.Last I checked,the PLQ are federalists and never had sovereignty on the table. Clearly people are tired of PLQ and if it were not for that and if the PQ was still a relevant party,CAQ would be still be losers.

As I lamented earlier. Quebec has proven itself to be as Conservative as Southern and Middle America. I'm ashamed and embarrassed to be a Quebecer. We are most likeley going to have a right wing openly xenophobic government. CAQ is the party of La Meute.

It seems like there's a bit of a sovereinty paradox in Canada, in which:

- we must always remember that some Quebec voters wish sovereignty

- we don't need to worry about those Quebec voters; it's over and done with for the next several generations

So, if you want to criticize something about Quebec, well, "remember those sovereigntists, and don't piss them off, lest they take their football and leave", or, "don't make any kind of special allowance for Quebec, because sovereignty is already laying in its cold grave. They're just another province now".

It's such a trite excuse that I feel tired even attempting it, but in this case it has an element of truth to it: Your opinion of Québec, and the paradox you see, may come from the media. Specifically the old white anglophone Gazette media, representing that minority of the "angryphone" population I sometimes think of as the Ascendancy.

The Gazette needs to push two contradictory and simultaneous viewpoints to keep its aging readership. First, anglo-Québecers need to be a constantly oppressed minority, terrified to fly the maple leaf. Second, sovereignty and even the French language as a whole need to be such lost causes that they're worthy of self-congratulatory mockery. It's not easy to maintain status as both the victor and the victim (Israel's the most successful at this worldwide at the moment, but there are plenty of other examples), but the Gazette will keep trying. Every year from now until it declares bankruptcy, I expect to see more and more indignant editorials about how anglos are proud Québecers, nobody has the right to call them less committed to the future of Montréal than francos, but they've still got Uncle Frank's guest house in Toronto in case the polls shift a bit and they need to get out of town.

Again, this isn't all anglo-Québecers. It certainly isn't me, and it isn't any of my anglo friends. But it is the majority of those who write Gazette editorials.

And once again,Legault can say anything he likes but behind the facade is a right wing sovereignist,make no mistake about it and if the issue of sovereignty were to become popular again,he'd jump ship from his federalist disguise. In a hot second at that. It would be naive to ever think that this man's ideology has changed at all since his days in the PQ. But he put it on the back burner because he wants power at any cost.

He isn't pretending to be federalist. He is just dropping the sovereignty by referendum issue. No change in ideology.

alan smithee wrote:

So OF COURSE Quebecers care if he's a sovereignist or not.

No they don't. They don't care about his ideology, many are not against sovereignty, they just don't want another referendum or more talk about separation. They just want the subject closed for now.

I agree that he is a right wing prick. He is still pulling votes from the Liberals and the PQ because he is willing to put the issue of sovereignty on the back burner and not talk about it or separation. I believe him because it isn't good for business. It would also be fine for QS and PQ to be ideologically sovereignist if they also agreed to just leave it on the back burner and promise not to have a referendum or push it in any way if elected; to focus 100% on governing the province. QS would still need a leader who would become Premier in the event that they won the election. Not having one signals they aren't even serious about winning the election.

Oh Pondering. You may be right that he dropped sovereignty from official party policy but it's not because he's a federalist. Maybe in the interest of business but that's about it.

I JUST SAID LIKE 4 TIMES THAT HE ISN'T A FEDERALIST.

Legault is not a federalist. Legault, the leader of CAQ, is not a federalist. Federalism is not the ideology of Legault.

It doesn't matter. The point isn't whether or not someone is ideologically sovereignist. They can adore sovereignty. They just have to shut up about it. They have to say "no referendum" and "no committees" that they will just govern period. That is what Legault is saying. He is not claiming to be federalist because he isn't a federalist. He has even declared that he is going to try to get more powers for Quebec. For the second time "sovereignty by stealth". That means he is still a sovereignist he is just going about it a different way.

It isn't about being sovereignist or federalist it's about being willing to drop the subject. People want to talk about taxes and health and education and road work not about sovereignty and referendums.

Talking about sovereignty is a huge irritant both to people who oppose it and to some who support it too.

CAQ is officially a non-sovereignist party from the perspective of having referendums and promoting it in general. For that reason for many voters they are the alternative to the Liberals not the PQ or QS both of whom promote sovereignty.

I have no idea if the NDPQ will be able to take seats that would otherwise go to CAQ but it is certainly possible. If the regions are as Conservative as some claim then how do you explain the Orange Wave?

Inequality impacts everyone. I don't know if Singh, with Caron's help, can make a strong enough pitch to win people over but it is within the realm of possibility.

It seems like there's a bit of a sovereinty paradox in Canada, in which:

- we must always remember that some Quebec voters wish sovereignty

- we don't need to worry about those Quebec voters; it's over and done with for the next several generations

So, if you want to criticize something about Quebec, well, "remember those sovereigntists, and don't piss them off, lest they take their football and leave", or, "don't make any kind of special allowance for Quebec, because sovereignty is already laying in its cold grave. They're just another province now".

It's such a trite excuse that I feel tired even attempting it, but in this case it has an element of truth to it: Your opinion of Québec, and the paradox you see, may come from the media. Specifically the old white anglophone Gazette media, representing that minority of the "angryphone" population I sometimes think of as the Ascendancy.

The Gazette needs to push two contradictory and simultaneous viewpoints to keep its aging readership. First, anglo-Québecers need to be a constantly oppressed minority, terrified to fly the maple leaf. Second, sovereignty and even the French language as a whole need to be such lost causes that they're worthy of self-congratulatory mockery. It's not easy to maintain status as both the victor and the victim (Israel's the most successful at this worldwide at the moment, but there are plenty of other examples), but the Gazette will keep trying. Every year from now until it declares bankruptcy, I expect to see more and more indignant editorials about how anglos are proud Québecers, nobody has the right to call them less committed to the future of Montréal than francos, but they've still got Uncle Frank's guest house in Toronto in case the polls shift a bit and they need to get out of town.

Again, this isn't all anglo-Québecers. It certainly isn't me, and it isn't any of my anglo friends. But it is the majority of those who write Gazette editorials.

2 words. Howard Galganov. He may not live here anymore but he still has his groupies that share is anti-Quebecois views. My question to these 'angryphones' is ' why the hell do you live here?' If you can't see a French sign without feeling oppressed,pack your bags and join Galganov.

The only good idea I heard from these people is the idea of giving Montreal more powers,autonomy and a disconnect from Quebec City.

I don't support that for the same reasons these anglo=centric bigots do. They want English signs (like you haven't leatned to at least READ the French language),they want Montreal to seperate from Quebec. I want Montreal to have the power of self determination.

These things I strongly disagree with. If you don't like the French face of Quebec,get the hell out of here.

I personally think Montreal should be distinct from the rest of Quebec because the National Assembly and the regioms is stifling this city. We're a metropolis,our reality is completely distinct from the realities of rural Quebec. I think Montreal should be like DC. Not apart of Quebec City or Ottawa.

But that isn't going to happen. Quebec tries hard to hang onto their culture,a culture,by the way, that is richer than angko culture which is a slightly lighter America. It's not as open minded or friendly either.

But I do agree a 100% with what you said about the Gazoo. I can't even read the sports section,the comments are the usual whiners not understanding why Quebec isn't as English as Ontario or the rest of the country (minus New Brunswick which is completely bilingual). It's a hot bed for anti-Quebecois culture. My advice,which I have written in comment sections in the Gazette is simple,if you don't like it here and bitch about French signs (you honestly can't at least READ French?) and our taxes,well pack your bags and move,I'll help you pack. If you're concerned that Quebec is becoming more and more Conservative and you don't feel comfortable here anymore,then I feel your pain.

I must make it clear that I am definitely NOT an angryphone and out of the small circle of English speaking friends,none of them fall into that category either.

And once again,Legault can say anything he likes but behind the facade is a right wing sovereignist,make no mistake about it and if the issue of sovereignty were to become popular again,he'd jump ship from his federalist disguise. In a hot second at that. It would be naive to ever think that this man's ideology has changed at all since his days in the PQ. But he put it on the back burner because he wants power at any cost.

He isn't pretending to be federalist. He is just dropping the sovereignty by referendum issue. No change in ideology.

alan smithee wrote:

So OF COURSE Quebecers care if he's a sovereignist or not.

No they don't. They don't care about his ideology, many are not against sovereignty, they just don't want another referendum or more talk about separation. They just want the subject closed for now.

I agree that he is a right wing prick. He is still pulling votes from the Liberals and the PQ because he is willing to put the issue of sovereignty on the back burner and not talk about it or separation. I believe him because it isn't good for business. It would also be fine for QS and PQ to be ideologically sovereignist if they also agreed to just leave it on the back burner and promise not to have a referendum or push it in any way if elected; to focus 100% on governing the province. QS would still need a leader who would become Premier in the event that they won the election. Not having one signals they aren't even serious about winning the election.

Oh Pondering. You may be right that he dropped sovereignty from official party policy but it's not because he's a federalist. Maybe in the interest of business but that's about it.

I JUST SAID LIKE 4 TIMES THAT HE ISN'T A FEDERALIST.

Legault is not a federalist. Legault, the leader of CAQ, is not a federalist. Federalism is not the ideology of Legault.

It doesn't matter. The point isn't whether or not someone is ideologically sovereignist. They can adore sovereignty. They just have to shut up about it. They have to say "no referendum" and "no committees" that they will just govern period. That is what Legault is saying. He is not claiming to be federalist because he isn't a federalist. He has even declared that he is going to try to get more powers for Quebec. For the second time "sovereignty by stealth". That means he is still a sovereignist he is just going about it a different way.

It isn't about being sovereignist or federalist it's about being willing to drop the subject. People want to talk about taxes and health and education and road work not about sovereignty and referendums.

Talking about sovereignty is a huge irritant both to people who oppose it and to some who support it too.

CAQ is officially a non-sovereignist party from the perspective of having referendums and promoting it in general. For that reason for many voters they are the alternative to the Liberals not the PQ or QS both of whom promote sovereignty.

I have no idea if the NDPQ will be able to take seats that would otherwise go to CAQ but it is certainly possible. If the regions are as Conservative as some claim then how do you explain the Orange Wave?

Inequality impacts everyone. I don't know if Singh, with Caron's help, can make a strong enough pitch to win people over but it is within the realm of possibility.

I keep repeating the fact that legault is not an actual federalist because a lot of people seem to buy his claim of being federalist. He's completely full of shit and I'm very happy we agree about that.

As for why the regions went Orange under Layton,it was Layton's down to earth demeanor and populist ideals. It's like explaining why Bernie Sanders is popular even in red states. Both Jack Layton and Bernie Sanders knew (know) that we have more in common than not. It's also about policy and how you talk to people and come across as truthful and genuine. It's a winning formula in any country. Rationality is infectious.

As for sovereignty,Legault dropped that potato when he saw both the writing on the wall that that movement is on its death bed and that renouncing referendums would benefit him as he desperately seeks to be the King of Quebec.

If sovereignty support were to grow back to where it was 20,30 or 40 years ago,make no mistake,CAQ would be promising referendums in a flash. That's the point I've been making in all my posts about CAQ. Legault and CAQ are shameless political opportunists.As a government,they will reveal their true face and I'm convinced that face is ugly and horrifying.

And I don't believe Singh or Caron can influence this election. There's no way. Again as I have said 10 times,the NDPQ is not currently a thing. So Singh and Caron can try to weigh in on this year's election but they will be as important to the Quebec electorate as what colour underwear the candidates are wearing. Right now Singh wields no influence in Quebec politics. Sorry. And Singh isn't the answer to every challenge in this country. I don't know why you're mentioning him in a thread about Quebec politics and elections.

I would like to point out that MANY federalists, politicians or not, have fought for more powers for Québec, for recognition of the Québécois nation and support to the French language. Claude Ryan was one of the most prominent figures of this orientation, but even Bourassa had quite a bit of it. Not all federalists are doormats like Couillard.

Moreover, "a sovereignist is a sovereignist"? QS, or the historic left wing of the PQ, the same as the CAQ or La Meute? Gérald Godin (the only péquiste I ever voted for) must be rolling over in his grave. He was very much for an inclusive Québec - but also, as a poet, a champion of the French language.

In reality, some of the NDP MPs are far from committed federalists either. And QS and NDP supporters vote and often campaign for each other, and all for Projet Montréal.

Galganov is now living in eastern Ontario and persecuting Franco-Ontarians (most of whom are federalists for obvious reasons). He's just a bigot.

There is less and less local content in the Gazoo. I sometimes glance at it - hell, I sometimes glance at le Journal de Montréal, then have a wee vomit - because they often have coverage on "urbanist" issues that I'm involved in. But the poor oppressed angryphones...

I personally think Montreal should be distinct from the rest of Quebec because the National Assembly and the regioms is stifling this city. We're a metropolis,our reality is completely distinct from the realities of rural Quebec. I think Montreal should be like DC. Not apart of Quebec City or Ottawa.

DC is directly governed by Congress, with a delegated ability to elect its own mayor going back only to the 1970s or so. You want the opposite of that status. How is the "metropolis" defined, anyway? City of Montréal only? Island? Do Laval and Brossard get to come along, or are they the same kind of "regions" as Rimouski? What extra powers should city council get?

I personally think Montreal should be distinct from the rest of Quebec because the National Assembly and the regioms is stifling this city. We're a metropolis,our reality is completely distinct from the realities of rural Quebec. I think Montreal should be like DC. Not apart of Quebec City or Ottawa.

DC is directly governed by Congress, with a delegated ability to elect its own mayor going back only to the 1970s or so. You want the opposite of that status. How is the "metropolis" defined, anyway? City of Montréal only? Island? Do Laval and Brossard get to come along, or are they the same kind of "regions" as Rimouski? What extra powers should city council get?

I'm talking about the Island of Montreal. Just for an example,look at the homeless problem we have in this city. This is not a reality in Rimouski or Lac St-Jean. Montreal needs the power to drag these people from the Third World conditions they live in. A progressive government in La Vielle Capitale could use funds to do this. A Conservative government in Quebec City would not fund an initiative like that. We need social and affordable husing in the city,not millions of dollars on lighting the Jacques Cartier Bridge for one or two days.

Cleaning the city's ills should be a priority. Quebec will never fund these programs,especially a Legault government. He has to play to his base which is rural Quebec and the regions INCLUDING Quebec City and everywhere that surrounds it. We need to prioritize the health of this city for this city to thrive as it used to. More European inspired policies that will open up molre activities for tourists. Who cares if they come to smoke legal cannabis? The welcome mat would greet you arrive.

Montreal needs the power to take on urban realities. This can't be done with a party whose base is rural Quebec or the bigoted regions. There is massive dfferences in the big city. Problems that can't be solved with the Quebec government.

Also realities like drug abuse or recreational drug use. You think CAQ will give the green light to open up more safe injection sites? Do you think CAQ will allow legal cannabis consumption. I highly doubt it. We can go it alone. We are the engine in which runs this province. We should have more power. Just my opinion,OK? I don't expect anyone here to agree with it. And I don't care.

I would like to point out that MANY federalists, politicians or not, have fought for more powers for Québec, for recognition of the Québécois nation and support to the French language. Claude Ryan was one of the most prominent figures of this orientation, but even Bourassa had quite a bit of it. Not all federalists are doormats like Couillard.

Moreover, "a sovereignist is a sovereignist"? QS, or the historic left wing of the PQ, the same as the CAQ or La Meute? Gérald Godin (the only péquiste I ever voted for) must be rolling over in his grave. He was very much for an inclusive Québec - but also, as a poet, a champion of the French language.

In reality, some of the NDP MPs are far from committed federalists either. And QS and NDP supporters vote and often campaign for each other, and all for Projet Montréal.

Galganov is now living in eastern Ontario and persecuting Franco-Ontarians (most of whom are federalists for obvious reasons). He's just a bigot.

There is less and less local content in the Gazoo. I sometimes glance at it - hell, I sometimes glance at le Journal de Montréal, then have a wee vomit - because they often have coverage on "urbanist" issues that I'm involved in. But the poor oppressed angryphones...

Well if you carefully read my comment,I was bashing 'angryphones' and pointed out that a bigot like Galganov (who used to have a radio show on the now defunct AM600) still has followers. One notorious Galganov groupie was the gunman who stormed the PQ gathering on election night (and killed a totally innocent man). I read the comment section in the Gazette,I guess I'm a masochist and I read op-eds in the Journal de Montreal. You have angryphones on one end and fear promoting tabloid journalism in the French press. I don't agree with either.

And I'm not knocking sovereignty. I'm emphasizing as aggresssively as possible that Legault is a sovereignist even if he claims he's suddenly a federalist. I'm pointing out that he's a liar and an opportunist that will say what he thinks people want to hear,changing his stance more often than a human could possibly can.

I never put down QS but I'm honest about that party and yes,CAQ is the party of La Meute. They are the party for the backward,the bigoted,the racist and the fascist portion of our population. Legault said he would like to be like Donald Trump. Does anyone realize the implications of that? If not,you should.

I keep repeating the fact that legault is not an actual federalist because a lot of people seem to buy his claim of being federalist.

I've never heard him claim to be federalist and I don't think anyone would believe him.

alan smithee wrote:

​As for why the regions went Orange under Layton,it was Layton's down to earth demeanor and populist ideals.

Which is why I think Singh does have a chance. He is down to earth and inequality falls under populism.

alan smithee wrote:

And I don't believe Singh or Caron can influence this election. There's no way. Again as I have said 10 times,the NDPQ is not currently a thing. So Singh and Caron can try to weigh in on this year's election but they will be as important to the Quebec electorate as what colour underwear the candidates are wearing. Right now Singh wields no influence in Quebec politics. Sorry. And Singh isn't the answer to every challenge in this country. I don't know why you're mentioning him in a thread about Quebec politics and elections.

You're right. I got side-tracked. Raphaël Fortin is an unknown quality and we don't know who the reps will be in individual ridings. However the Orange Wave federally and the rapid rise of new parties in Quebec both federally and provinically illustrates Quebec volativity.

I doubt the NDPQ can win this election but that doesn't mean they can't make inroads or take votes that would otherwise go to CAQ. The fewer votes for the CAQ the better it is for the Liberals.

I keep repeating the fact that legault is not an actual federalist because a lot of people seem to buy his claim of being federalist.

I've never heard him claim to be federalist and I don't think anyone would believe him.

alan smithee wrote:

​As for why the regions went Orange under Layton,it was Layton's down to earth demeanor and populist ideals.

Which is why I think Singh does have a chance. He is down to earth and inequality falls under populism.

alan smithee wrote:

And I don't believe Singh or Caron can influence this election. There's no way. Again as I have said 10 times,the NDPQ is not currently a thing. So Singh and Caron can try to weigh in on this year's election but they will be as important to the Quebec electorate as what colour underwear the candidates are wearing. Right now Singh wields no influence in Quebec politics. Sorry. And Singh isn't the answer to every challenge in this country. I don't know why you're mentioning him in a thread about Quebec politics and elections.

You're right. I got side-tracked. Raphaël Fortin is an unknown quality and we don't know who the reps will be in individual ridings. However the Orange Wave federally and the rapid rise of new parties in Quebec both federally and provinically illustrates Quebec volativity.

I doubt the NDPQ can win this election but that doesn't mean they can't make inroads or take votes that would otherwise go to CAQ. The fewer votes for the CAQ the better it is for the Liberals.

This is why I look forward to 2023. I'll be older which sucks but that will be the year that you can talk about a possible NDP in Ottawa and Quebec.

That will be the year to have a constructive conversation about the NDP.

As to angryphones, like all other trolls in comment areas they make far more noise than their numbers justify. They are not representative of a significant portion of Quebec's population anglophone or otherwise.

I do think a great many people know the kind of p.o.s. Legault is. He is also vulgar and a bully. What we don't really know is what to do about him.

I don't feel the slightest "ashamed" of him or La Meute, because in no way have I supported them, any more than my friends in Ontario should be ashamed of Mike Harris and his loathsome agenda. Come to think of it, reminding people here of the great harm Harris caused might be an idea.

However, the left must PRESENT alternatives, not merely protest the right. I think QS and Projet Montréal, though they are very different parties, have done that well. The Ligne rose is inspiring. Yes, I want to get rid of fucking cars, but to do so, we need alternatives. I see people cycling on my street in this heavy snow and ice, but despite my lifetime commitment to utilitarian cycling, no way am I going to to it this month, unless there is a miraculous thaw. The diagonal line is needed because just extending the blue line - though it is necessary - will only further congest the orange line southbound to the city centre.

I personally think Montreal should be distinct from the rest of Quebec because the National Assembly and the regioms is stifling this city. We're a metropolis,our reality is completely distinct from the realities of rural Quebec. I think Montreal should be like DC. Not apart of Quebec City or Ottawa.

DC is directly governed by Congress, with a delegated ability to elect its own mayor going back only to the 1970s or so. You want the opposite of that status. How is the "metropolis" defined, anyway? City of Montréal only? Island? Do Laval and Brossard get to come along, or are they the same kind of "regions" as Rimouski? What extra powers should city council get?

Good point. And D.C. was stripped of the right of self-governance(its mayor and city council no longer have any real power) because its population committed the horrible crime of VWB-Voting While Black.